tv Capital News Today CSPAN November 27, 2012 11:00pm-2:00am EST
and as the senator said, that is something on which congress has demonstrated as recently as the last five or six years that it can come together, and i think it could do it again and in a more aggressive way to get advantage of the opportunities which we now know that we have. some states have already experienced it and by the way some of the regulars of electricity like california and new york have figured out how to make it attractive to energy providers, electricity providers to provide more efficiency to the ed vintage of the consumer by to reducing rates so there are many things we would be able to agree on and advance the cause of the carbonizing the economy. >> the diversity of fuel sources as well as efficiency travel parallel to the interest of the environmental policy in my judgment.
>> we did, the congress did agree on the standards and the administration has continued to work in the industry to move those numbers up even more so there is a classic example of how we did something. >> i wondered if the recommendations you are making i understand that you are trying to bring together all these agencies across the executive branch whether they are of the legislative branch is a very much partner in this. how do your recommendations bring the congressional leaders and to coordinate with them as well as the executive branch leadership? >> we will recommend that this would be institutionalized or created also legislatively. but i think the congress will
benefit from what our council would come up with. congress would benefit from. i guarantee you with the members of the congress particularly the senate we looked at the quadrennial report and we know what the result was of that in that study analysis of what we need going forward so it makes all kind of sense we do it in the energy field and that information would be available as they try to come up with legislation hopefully next year. >> the congress would have a central place to go to to talk about the bigger issues and they would maintain their oversight rights in the department so that would be unchanged but at least there would be much more cohesion in the articulation that we have today. >> i would add in the specifics of the recommendation is the consultation with the congress i think you will see in the report we have the facets of what makes
good energy policy and one is to make sure that you were taking up implemented actions. so that brings in this consultation of idea that it's not just won three of the government you have to do the implementation. >> leading up to the election every outlet came up with a short list of the cabinet for mitt romney come in for president obama. when you talk about setting up this agency council how do you guard against some sort of volatility in the national energy policy from the changing administration and the policies put in place by one administration carried over the success reforms. >> one person has to take the
recommendations seriously and consider that this has merit as the president in the issues i had the the president gave significance and this could be very significant move by the administration is taken seriously by everybody in the government and that in itself was a tremendous incentive to coordination. >> there will also be volatility in a second term there will be changes that have been there for four years or ready to get out but also this isn't something that would be done instantaneously i don't think it would be done under our proposal until the end of the fourth quarter given times so that
would be available to the administration i don't think it would be that big a problem although if you had the whole administration you would have a new group of the cabinet secretaries but usually the cabinet is filled usually in february at least they would have time to pull the council together. >> with different administrations there are different areas of emphasis but as i indicated in the congress where the energy has been bipartisan in the development of the energy policy i think it is also the case that conservative republican president or progressive democratic presidents generally speaking are still working within a small range of what is needed for the country and the energy policy and they might tend to emphasize one or another area more than the other administration. but i don't worry that the structure issues here in place
for multiple administration's i don't worry that the structure would be irrelevant to the different kinds of administration's. i think the structure and also the development of metrics which is important we haven't talked much about that. but when we talk about the quadrennial review we are talking about the development of metrics so that you can evaluate how have you moved relative to the strategy that's developed? that's an important element of these recommendations. >> i didn't realize it was made with the energy efficiencies what impact it has had all reducing our energy demands and usage and i found out as a part of this. i wanted to follow-up on the question earlier about the change to put it forward.
if you are talking about developing a national energy strategy to what degree should moving away from fossil fuel, what degree should that be a priority of the strategy and the entity that you are talking about? >> i don't think we want to anticipate the kind of things we are going to propose in january and some of which we haven't agreed to just that we very much believe in the full portfolio of the energy sources we are recognizing all would have to play a role in the nation's future with respect to fossil fuel and we will be discussing things like the way to construct subsidies or incentives or discontinue some subsidies. all of that will be in our
materials to participate early in the new year. but on that principle the country has got to have a complete portfolio of sources if we are to have a successful energy policy that works for the economy as well as the environment going forward. >> we may not have emphasized that but we will have a discussion in the report about how to go forward in that area also. >> quote when we have you got a strategy now for approaching the congressional leadership in the recommendations to make them recognize that it is a high priority? >> we are going to be working on that and we are committed to talking about what we are
recommending and taking it to the administration we obviously have members of the board that have contact and access to the administration. i have already discussed this with a number of the members in the senate in particular, lisa murkowski who would be the chairman and ranking in the energy committee and others that are going to be players in this area. so when we get the final product, we are going to take it to the administration for their review and evaluation as they move forward on the energy will. >> we will not have worked on this together much. we are interested in an aggressive strategy that will reach out to the administration and congress and say here is an attempt we believe that shows you can put a bipartisan group with different interests are around the table and reach an agreement on very important policy for the country.
>> we hope to engage other think tanks as well as the chamber of commerce and other organizations from around town to read what we produce and also join with us in supporting what is obviously something that is in the national interest. >> anyone else at the mic? we've exhausted questions. i want to thank the co-chairs for being with us and happy holidays to all. we hope to see you in january. thank you. [applause]
we could take the money we are spending today and build every school system 14,000 per child and save billions of dollars per year with the same or better outcomes. present obama welcome to to the white house on tuesday. before the meeting the leaders addressed the office. the president-elect took office on saturday december to date to november 1st but joe biden
allegation that the inauguration. this is 15 minutes. >> it is my great pleasure to welcome the president-elect to the oval office and to the white house this is a longstanding tradition i think the relationship between the countries we meet early with the president-elect of mexico that symbolizes the extraordinary relationship we have between the two countries. >> why >> [speaking in native tongue]
with >> over the last four years i've been able to work with the what president for lady calderon and we've established an excellent working relationship, so i wish him all the best. >> [speaking in native tongue] i'm confident i'm going to establish a personal relationship with the president-elect who lino house an outstanding reputation for wanting to get things done.
>> [speaking in native tongue] >> now the president i think represents the close ties between the two countries because i understand that he lived in the united states in maine for the year where the winners are even worse than chicago in my home town. >> [speaking in native tongue] >> but i think that is representative of the strength of the relationship between the united states and mexico. it is not just a matter of policy but it's a matter of people. as representatives go by, the many u.s. citizens who travel to
mexico and obviously the incredible contribution that mexican-americans made to our economy and our society and to our politics. >> [speaking in native tongue] roi >> i know the president has a very ambitious reform agenda, and we are very much looking forward to having a fruitful discussion here today about not only how we can strengthen our economic ties, our trade ties,
our coordination along the border, and improving our joint competitiveness as well as common security issues. but i think what i hope the president-elect is also interested in is a discussion about both of the regional and global issues because mexico has become not simply an important bilateral partner, but is today a very important multilateral, multinational leader on a whole range of issues from energy to climate change, and we look forward to working with mexico not only on regional issues but also on global issues. >> [speaking in native tongue]
>> what happens in mexico has an impact on our society. i know she's interested in what we do as well on the comprehensive immigration reform, and i will be sharing with him my interest in promoting some issues that are important to the united states but ultimately will be important to mexico as well. >> [speaking in native tongue] [speaking in native tongue] what was the mecca want to welcome you. congratulations on your outstanding victory. vice presidential biden will be
for your victory last november 6th for your second term as president to the united states and we wish you great success. i know you have a great task before you but i trust that you will be doing a wonderful job and i also want to thank you, president obama for having the vice president joe biden were go to mexico for the inaugural ceremony next saturday december 1st. i feel so pleased to be able to have the vice president biden represent you in mexico, and of course we are waiting for you in the delegation. >> [speaking in native tongue]
the >> this is an opportunity we only have every 12 years. you will be starting your next four year term. i will be starting a six year administration in mexico as you know and i think this is a great opportunity for all of us to have a closer link of brotherhood and sisterhood and collaboration and of course of great accomplishments we might have been working together. >> when was [speaking in native tongue]
[speaking in native tongue] >> i believe we have an important task before us. for instance we both congressmen, legislatures and respective in our own country they were sensitive to the needs of our people and we also share an important vision for creating more jobs we know this is important not only for the american people but for the mexican people for those of the
nation's. this is important in the country coming and we do have the opportunity to grow but not only about. we have the opportunity to integrate to be participating in this part of the world and i am so pleased that this is the situation we are in. >> [speaking in native tongue] >> and of course to increase the integration of north america to take advantage of the spaces we have not only in this part of the world but asia of course and just mentioning for instance one the trans-pacific partnerships and the government is very much
interested in strengthening this because we believe this is great be a great opportunity. >> [speaking in native tongue] [speaking in native tongue] >> yes and of course in terms of security that is another challenge we face. my government has set out to reduce the violent situation in the country, and for that of course we have set out to launch
>> for this migration reform demanding what you should do or shouldn't do we want it to contribute and participate towards the accomplishment. so of course we can participate in the betterment of so many millions of people that live in your country and that are also participating so we want to be part of this. >> [speaking in native tongue]
>> and i trust we will be able to have close relationships with our president and that of course i want to invite you to mexico to make a statement and as you know next year 2013 we are going to be holding the summit to the leader who and we hope to see you there. we will be waiting for you. >> any excuse to go to mexico i am always a game in fact i'm jealous of joe biden. anyway, thank you very much. thank you, everybody. [inaudible conversations]
prohibition. this event from the national constitution center in philadelphia is 50 minutes. >> good evening. it's a pleasure to be here. i want to thank you the program organizers for bring this together. dan has written a wonderful book and i think that you'll be impressed with what he's put together in the celebration of prohibition and the antiprohibition movement. it's an exciting time to talk about prevention for the reason that the election has been questioned the antiprovision before us all over again. in addition to develop initiative in colorado and washington, we also have in massachusetts and the new announcements and our island and maine the legislators and those of us in the jurisdiction to get the question of decriminalization of marijuana for recreational use. so, the question of the day i
think is what lessons can we draw from provision for today's? >> the first 1i think we all know prohibition was a terrible failure. despite the best we have to remind ourselves the good reasons. it was a very drunken country. the efforts didn't succeed. every society were no one could see that because if there is part of the world that wants something and another part wants to try at it will be provided and that is the case with prohibition and we've seen that with marijuana and the change in the law particularly by the popular vote now a reflection of the knowledge. but there is a second reason.
one of the very clear parallels between the u.s. today and a the u.s. in the early 30's leading up to the prohibition was the desperate need. it was really the depression that ended prohibition as much as anything else because suddenly that 25% unemployment capital gains tax couldn't exist any longer between 19211. so the government is broke running on fumes, where can you get some revenue? the prohibition before the income tax level. as much as 40% no one wants to seem to pay taxes and legislate taxes, so that is. if somebody wants something they can purchase it or say to the federal ground and both we will get richer so it is an interesting parallel petraeus
pnac there is a difference between alcohol and marijuana. one has a certain cultural tradition that transcends a generation. marijuana perhaps not the same edition. what lessons can you draw? >> kuran absolutely right. it was an integral part of some one of the center for of millennia before prohibition. there are indigenous people in this country but it was not as antonette in the life and society also it was today than 50 years ago and there's a generational issue wow were people who grew up with the presence of marijuana whether the appreciated it or not was back in the 1950's. >> what's interesting about the drug law today is the seems to be released the criminal
components leading some civil penalties in place maybe even giving away with those as well if the local level we still have the federal law would marijuana means a schedule one narcotic means it isn't for medicinal use so we are in a conceptual problem the government is taking one position for the use of marijuana and state and local people are taking a different position. how are we supposed to enforce the law? >> this highlights what is so different and in the u.s. they are bottom-up and top down. provision is a great example of that. before it got to the point we would have done a grand thing. there were dozens of states experimenting with infil law and but to the coast in the budget legislatures but these are examples of spending yet again.
federal law remains unchanged in this area but the states had to experiment in their laboratories of democracy and in another country when there are changes and any law were so the united states has had changes in trade bloc but someone decides things are going to change, they declare it and that is the rule for the whole country from the capitol to the rest of the country. these debates and all of our other controversy alta bates or bottom-up so that is what we are seeing in this debate. >> revolutions raise the government's because it has to become once we release the pressure and open up the possibility for the recreation or medical drug use that means the state is in power to
regulate, license, tax the use sale distribution of marijuana. are there any concerns that the power of the people in the hands of the government. >> i will take a crack at that because there is a parallel of prohibition. for me have been riding on it for about six years and the one thing is a realization that it became harder to get back to the repeal than it had been during prohibition and in philadelphia 1928 if you're 14-years-old and wanted to get a drink at four in the morning on a sunday he could walk down in 20 different places. liquor didn't exist in the law there for it was and regulate it would mw the philadelphia police
department was the most rifled in the country with. one he put in the liquor law that everybody in this room knew about and it became much, much harder. you have to buy only from this state and the closing wall will come age limits. you can't be near a church or school or hospital the rid of the tory environment in which the state is a strong interest attached to and the individual retailer for restaurant for package store they can't take the risks that were so easy to face in the prohibition and our drinking levels were down until
1972. islamic there's an interesting parallel with a precursor. the harrison act of 1914 the government passed a regulation to basically manages the distribution for medicinal purposes. it was an effort the was later converted into a provision barring enforcement officials that began to go after the positions who were basically providing prescriptions to people who need it but the problem is that addiction was sent a medical illness the was recognized some consequence they thought they were operating in the act ultimately driven underground that generated a black market for harold. so the open up the possibility for the regulation.
it could be why the regulators and a very interesting way. >> this relates to one of the major themes about prohibition and the modern issue is enforcement. they are words on paper, questions about whether or not the government is going to force them are they going to force them to investigate and is the federal government going to design prosecutors against people, some of the legacies is even after the amendment is passed and it's gone from being in the constitution the modern administrative savings created through prohibition in order to enforce the act, to enforce the 18th amendment the federal government has to hire lots of people and developed the law to regulate these new federal law enforcement officials said one of the things the drug law implicates this the capacity of the federal government and prosecutorial so whenever the federal government does, what
ever this attorney general or another attorney general says might be very different than what they do when they have the money to go out and investigate and prosecute and to make that a pretty well. >> the saying republican congress provision isn't -- they were very stricter and stricter liberal laws that didn't want to appropriate any money. they have a philosophical as one said one day at a symbology were of the prohibition but not the actual effect.
the mayor of new york every year he would introduce the measure to increase the budget per the provision by 104 from two and a half million to $150 million forcing them to vote against enforcement because they didn't want to spend money. >> so what is the federal government supposed to do now given the positions they find themselves in which is very similar they could agree to not change the schedule one designation of marijuana but simply a under enforce. >> they could go under after the egregious violators that will permit more medical use for recreational use. but you could imagine there'd be the increased violations or all the distributions. we aren't going to go after the
people that violate the federal law but we are going to go after them what the president might do in response to this. >> the simple answer is the federal government can't do much it doesn't have much in the way of resources. certainly it's true and the time of prohibition the criminal law and the state law matters so from the constitutional perspective of the things about the prohibition is the federal government getting involved which is very unusual of the time and still about 90% of the criminal prosecutions of the state level. there is just not the interest, the experience, the resources to do that much so there might be selective prosecutions for these cases but unless something changed in the paradigm shift one there isn't much in the way.
>> can they do it by withdrawing money making comparisons that back in the 1970's they couldn't impose law but they said if you want your highway money you must adopt so the government could do it by the withstanding of the funds but what they want to. >> after the decision in the health care case there are questions about the government's capacity, the conditions and certain things the state passes. so how that changes some of these earlier ones are clear but one of the reasons the federal government spent money because they don't have to hire people and that the chiefs with the goal of giving more people more officials said this is much more in common than the united states during something darkly as writing a check. that's the major federal law.
the drug law and drug enforcement. there's also the case appears on the versus the united states and i was teaching my students today. >> the case is relatively straightforward. you have states like arizona that have adopted at the popular level but it interferes with the federal government prepares to do in the same hearing. you could imagine the context of enforcement they could fire for the medical use of marijuana. does that strike you as something that is why yoel will -- a viable. if i may i would like to stand
back for just a second and make clear our current ralf is failing. i was never interested myself and my kids were a teenager and are later found out they were using this and not making the case for marijuana. i'm making the failure to lose. the government in colorado said don't break out the freedoms and the gold fish yet. it's hard to imagine what this federal government with other things to worry about like somebody in boulder colorado. >> that's an important lesson for the prohibition. one of the other issues that comes up with the federal drug
law is the enforcement which is to push the entire system of drug production under ground in the market giving bribes to the culture and things like that. did that happen during prohibition the rise of the culture and was the antiprohibition movement the repeal of prohibition did that result in the reduction to use >> what we had in the national force is created this is in to see there was an organized crime before prohibition. usually this is on a city by city basis there would be a neighborhood where you would have the constitution, gambling, drugs, liquor being sold outside of the bigger lipari system all
the hours in the night and they control the neighborhoods very happy with a great deal of money. along comes prohibition and suddenly there are large quantities of the physical goods that take up a great deal of space moved from one deal to another specifically in philadelphia. it was much the heart of what the word chemical industry and then shipped from philadelphia to many cities in the midwest so the philadelphia mob had our allies in each of the of your cities but this led to the meeting in the place of 1929 as a lost city taken together as a syndicate, said prices, made contracts and then setting up there in judicial system three
involve conflicts one verso none of the table making rules that was child prohibition. the crime as we can to know it of a national scale was prohibition. the optus parallel mobsters need huge amounts of money and perpetrated a great deal of violent crimes. it's driving the same sort of craven behavior and violent behavior in this underground market. finally, the people that are most opposed to the change in the marijuana law are the marijuana dealers. they have a strong interest and keeping it legal. there were only two groups that were for prohibition. we have the same sort of thing going on now.
>> how to the manifest themselves? >> welcome and california it's interesting on the ballot in california i measured it in 2010 and was entitled im -- this is a part you can get about the private enterprise. there's one other possibility of course in thinking about how to solve this come from with federal enforcement. they could have congress change the drug law. there would be interesting plea on the part of the exit to get some. it may be having a legislative solution that the federal level with congress represented by the people as well to get the
congress is so paralyzed it's hard to do anything these days. they've made some changes along the margin in the past few decades. most is from the state level so it's hard to imagine. if the executive branch which the bush administration we have a big supreme court case about that coming out in california. this administration is less likely but regardless of what the executive branch does major changes are going to come from the state level. >> i am thinking perhaps we should open things up for questions. anyone who would like to ask a question you can approach the microphone. it's on this side. >> why
>> if any of you encounter any serious movements in favor of legalizing other drugs like marijuana. keillor on the fringe of the issue. as i can make the case of the failure of the drug law in marijuana the logic is identical to any and that's scary. the motion if anyone wants to run the can get. it's undeniable and it runs against what we wished the culture war was i got on the political arena and beyond that
because onawa you begin with a single step. some of the public opinion has a substantial. whatever the opinion is about marijuana. >> of course you have to remember is a different context for each one of these drugs. there's been to be a much deeper said opposition against with some of the more problematic scheduled narcotics. but you are exactly right. the logic is safe. one way to hedge against that possibility is to adopt it much more structured regulatory posture with respect to marijuana which signaled that one we're looking at this very closely and it's unlikely to be to the extent it is posing a
greater danger. >> before the act when was transformed and mutated into what it was they were in the regime doctors were able to prescribe that we. was that a successful new? >> the act itself grew out of a treaty. these are countries dividing were much of the opium to the united states so it was more of a fulfillment of an international obligation is the distribution. whether or not it was working at the regulatory matter i'd just don't know. was a long before it was turned into a prohibition mechanism. >> i'm not crazy about the idea of people getting behind the deal and the regulations
regarding marijuana with how much you can safely smoke. >> they are already against the law to operate a vehicle while under the influence with a certain level of disability brought on by the consumption of marijuana. many states don't have that under the book because it doesn't exist. it's just during prohibition liquor didn't exist. i believe it is the case that if you have legalized marijuana you would have every police officer that has a breathalyzer that determines how much alcohol would have a device to determine how much thc is in the blood stream would make it legal or illegal. this is making the case that they could then bring about a better control and fewer drivers
under the influence. >> ayman anesthesiologist. i work in operating rooms and trauma centers. i anderson and there is a time and place for drugs and one of the things that grieves me about my specialty is that in the last 30 years there's been exactly one drug come into the world. my question is if he were to legalize and legitimate the use of marijuana and attack city and regulate it and so on and so forth, might that not be down to creating the climate where people and organizations and companies at the goodwill can look at marijuana and similar drugs and investigate with such
to create new and better for the treatment of chronic pain? >> outside of my area of expertise but this is what i would say by legislating and bringing the entire thing there may be investment dollars that can go into them to allow the variation on the structure not marijuana which is certainly the case. the companies are already out there looking for the newest and the best drug. i don't think they wouldn't look at it as a possibility. >> what would keep them from doing it now? they are certainly still working with opium. >> [inaudible]
as i said before, was complicating a lot of days is to actually make a gazebo in a nationwide policy. if we had a series of steep icy positions, they might legalize it was some parts of the old file. were more likely to see a patchwork of successful legalization. >> one of the great quotes as i hope one of these days they will reduce consumption survey know the crowd above -- our dear mark
is it a question of return on investment for the rapid expansion of government or is there the incredible rise of incarceration rate? what are the to discuss this failure? >> another one i would add that has to do self-definition, who worry are sick people in society. the war has been going on 42 years. i don't know any of the world would tolerate going on so long that we are losing so much money on. as the people we define ourselves as the civilization that please you shouldn't do things that are bad for you and bad for the economy. is this matter of saying that
which you believe is more important than what you can accomplish. how you translate the language of political philosophy, i'm not quite sure. it's not a question of imposing -- none of these are efforts to legislate orality. they legislate against human desire. [inaudible] -- a parallel between not movement [inaudible] >> all it dressed the temperance
issue. i a person is people who want to be able to deny someone else the opportunity. the temperance movement, the women's movement was a very, very noble movement. [inaudible] divorce is a rarity and has been surgery and can themselves the poor house. it was terrible and he was too free women -- it's hard for me to get to the comparison. [inaudible] [laughter]
>> most major changes in this country come from popular movement, where major changes -- [inaudible] >> there is a meaningful parallel to the acceptance of marijuana. it's the same generation that is most comfortable with one is most comfortable with the other. [inaudible] the democratic party now, but neither of political parties have been. >> in 2010, not a single elected official --
[inaudible] >> the one thing people do have is the other college cohort may be appear, [inaudible] >> i have a question going back to driving. if you're pulled over for drinking and driving is how much alcohol is in your system. but if someone were to be pulled over and had marijuana in the past hour, maybe they haven't. you couldn't tell if it smoked it a week ago.
[inaudible] >> and this brings up an even larger point, the problematic relationship people have with substance. whether drugs are legal or illegal. there's the larger social question about a healthy relationship with substance abuse. >> please tell me if my question is too simplistic. is marijuana a gateway drug? >> i can take a crack at it.
this is one of those questions where it is. i have read a of reports that signaled to me that it is not a gateway drug. pacino, someone not particularly familiar with marijuana or other chugs -- i can't attest. but it's not a gateway drug to harder schedule ones. [inaudible] people who want marijuana today can get marijuana today.
i don't think that changes the dynamic. >> i grew up in the era and in high school and easier trip to get for people my age is marijuana because the guy selling marijuana didn't not her. sign that someone who is a minor wasn't that big of a deal. but because you are put in to that situation, and again it is seen illegal situation. some of those other things, all of which i tried at the time.
not because i was plain enough. just because they were if they are coming your young come you're curious and you do it. so in the sense that it the gateway drug, it's partly so to go into a situation where they are by definition a legal. it's easier for a kid to get a drink that was afterwards. it's easier to get to harder drugs, but to go to somebody -- [inaudible] i don't know the answer. i know there are various treaties. under the united states tries to enforce policies in other countries that it states in the
u.s. were to go, are we going to get ourselves in any trouble? >> i don't know much about the treaty arrangements that regulates drugs, but i did read an interesting article with the legalization of marijuana and that's not a treaty arrangement, but obviously economically they had some political ramifications . >> and enormous came in directly to the bahamas. the people before prohibition -- [inaudible] off the coast of newfoundland.
the arrival that the deal -- [inaudible] you can imagine what winston churchill said about prohibition. >> speaking of history, you could talk a little bit about lessons from prohibition and the constitution, things that hope it will not compete again. it is important to learn about this from the constitutional history? >> i'm not an expert, the anomaly of prohibition to limit the powers of government in the
lives of individuals that only in two places where the rights of individuals over the knitted by the constitution. the 13th amendment said you couldn't delay. i think that's a lesson that our constitutional system we have a lot of other things to be concerned about. the referenda, initiatives. [inaudible] >> the constitutional doctrine in rules that come out of prohibition.
homestead is the major supreme court case that is more generally a private item. the significance is that anything can be done. we can pass something -- [inaudible] article v of the constitution is very much up in the air to the constitutional amendment. after prohibition from the supreme court challenged whether or not you can do anything. and also, this is the only 21st amendment -- [inaudible] done by ratifying convention.
so the prohibition kind of opens the doors. on the larger question, every major political party has a constitutional dimension. even more in the not -- [inaudible] it's that the constitution is in the middle of exactly what we're doing in the length of the constitution. every major political issue we've had, foreign policy is very much a constitutional issue. it's very much studying the way that we are.
>> tying those things together if i may, one of the important policies with the five, four vote that was against wiretapping without mirandized and suggests that the rate precisely the word for dear slater wrote with prohibition. >> a quick question on this. we don't do that now. it's just done by law. >> because laws are very easy to undo. the majority of congress today passes the love with the
affordable health care act. it's undone by this time. before there was a repeal of any amendment, it it's beyond being a fat dude by the ripples and waves of partisan policy. [inaudible] [inaudible] so that's about the drinking age. the federal government has a law to improve their highways. if you want the money it makes her changes.
so everybody in the spaces can or cannot be sent thing. so we've got money for you. if you want the money you have to tell your citizens -- [inaudible] >> it is based on the commerce clause. the federal government could prohibit. >> now that they don't believe in the commerce clause any longer, only five of six justices voted -- [inaudible] >> even better.
>> no final thoughts from me. what about the others? [inaudible] i'm sure there are some people here who believe that. but it's become socially unacceptable to say so, similar to other things such as same-sex marriage. >> on the constitutional law is, [inaudible] that was another major moment. we have to face the debate over prohibition. [inaudible]
>> the bipartisan policy center holds a form when dan the so-called fiscal cliff and with the current congress can learn from the 1990 budget deal between president george h.w. bush and democrat. we'll be live starting at 9:00 a.m. eastern on their companion network from the c-span 3. >> now, from secretary of state, condoleezza rice and former chancellor of new york city public schools, scholl klein discussed the educational system and its impact on national
security. part of a two-day summit with policymakers and education leaders, hosted by the foundation for excellent education. it's about an hour. [applause] >> welcome to this evening broadcast on morning joe. the energy and thus are a visceral testament to writing two things. one aside the issue of educational reform has ripened. it's a combination of need, the talent we see in this term has coalesced around this issue to detect elegies, but there is a sense that the moment has arrived. and the other is 73 bush. [applause] i am a great believer that two
things matter in life. one of the idea and the others people. that's the real driver of change, the real trailer of this silly when you want pack it all. and jeb is a perfect example of a person coming together with real talent and commitment come with a set of ideas. the fact is sure i'll hear is the greatest salute you could give. condi and i come out of the national security background paper gangsters the semester on to something called the everyman bond calculator. it used to calculate what mr. and mrs. eep, the circular error probable blast effects of nuclear weapons. here we are today. we traveled a considerable distance. the other person that comes to mind is mike mullen, former chairman of the joint chiefs of staff when he asked what was the
greatest threat facing the united states. he didn't say al qaeda. he didn't say a rising china, iran or north korea. what he said was the deficit in the state of american society. i think that's exactly right. you can look at questions of the budget. you can look at questions of infrastructure. immigration policy. but above all, education policy. this is the future. we're not talking about her physical infrastructure. and joel klein is someone who's given his most recent phase of his multi-career when he discovers the best restaurants in brooklyn, is focused on improving a lot of young people in this country. it's supposed to be the other way around. so i'm going to tell you how condi has been dedicated to this issue. a year and a half ago i called her up and said convy, i want
you to do some thing for me and with me. she said richard coming to b.c. don't even start. i said okay. i said before the end of this conversation come you're going to agree with going to ask you. and she said no way. i said with the council on foreign relations and all of our time working on things like china and mexico and all the traditional foreign-policy issues. we believe the agenda and all things domestic. but we want to do is report on education. we don't wonder. whatever else is done. what is the relationship between the challenges in k-12 education and national security of the united states. and it didn't turn out to be
terribly hard stop. she knew i had her at that point. it didn't take a follow-up phone call. she was paid. the coach at this report of the commission. the whole idea educators, but people often don't come together in the same space and essentially say -- they raise the questions about the relationship between the educational challenges we face in the national security challenges we face and the summaries to recast as a share, retain this issue for a broader audience because in some ways the fact you are here reflects the fact you are here at the risk of being redundant. bobo bluebonnet to do was get at
people who read foreign affairs rather than the chronicle of higher education and journals such as that. so what they've done about two dozen other old outfit out this report. if you haven't read it and you would like to read it it's on cfr.org. the idea was not so much the result, but the issue center stage. so let me just turn to them to start and basically say, wishes to the basic question, which is what we write. is there a close link? between the state of k-12 education and the secretary. >> thank you very much. indeed i was delighted that the
organization affiliated for a lot of years was prepared to look at what i call the domestic forces of american strain because without the strength at home, we don't lead abroad. so i thought this is very first fateful to do this. secondly, i was looking forward to the opportunity to work with joel who i've gotten to know a nightmare for what he did in new york city and continues to do on education reform and to visit task force. i want to make three brief points about this link i think we all found between national security and education reform. first of all, the one that is most evident when you hear some of the statistics that i've seen mentioned our global competitiveness. that's generally where people go
eventually you lose the innovation rate. you are not going to be able to educate people for the jobs available. those jobs will go elsewhere. our mobile growth and competitiveness. that in some ways is the most obvious link. we are not preparing people for the work place. the workplace is a 21st century, we are not going to lobby the world's most competitive and innovative economy. second in some ways more surprising for me was brought to us by the former chief -- former secretary of the army, who talked about the problems in our education system and the relationship to the armed forces. the inability of some 70% of americans actually qualify for service in the air force thought to be a red flag for anyone. now yes, there are other reasons
for that incarceration, obesity, but a fair amount if people can't pass the basic skills test to get into the military. just imagine that a developed country, the most powerful country in the world and we can't get people to have the basic skills test to get into the military. the analog for me as secretary of state was realizing how few people are to learn foreign languages in a timely fashion, meaning when you were younger how many people can find something on a map that is not the united states of america. the fact we don't have people prepared to go into the intelligence agencies, but we brought ourselves of talent at literally the national security infrastructure. the third and to be most importantly if it's a tragedy people will not be prepared for
good jobs and therefore go on the dole because they have nowhere else to go. it's a tragedy people can't serve in the armed forces, for the intelligence agency, but the united states of america is held together by a great national creed. not by ethnicity, not by blood, not by religion. our national creed is an aspirational narrative that it doesn't matter where you came from, in matters where you're going. you could come from humble circumstances good you can do great things. the only way that is true is if you have access to high-quality education. and if it ever becomes the case as it is increasingly now, as i've said many times i can ligatures at code and tell whether you're going to get a good education and the social fabric of this country has no chance to hold together and we will be pit one against the other. those who are capable and those who are not. those who are employable and
those who are not. i can assure you that the sense that she might not be able to control your circumstances, which you can control is your response to your circumstances, that will no longer be the way americans think about themselves or about each other and that gives way to end the debridement and entitlement. so to me, i record the real problem for us in national security is not just our competitiveness abroad. not just our institution for the national security, the great national narrative and cohesion that is made us a country that we are. [applause] >> by me just say i think people responded because the words you just said in front of the words
jeb said this morning are some of the most important words this country has to hear. one thing that bothers me enormously assiduous into the presidential race we didn't hear those words. you did in your speech and joel speech, but those are not part of our national debate. when you think about the fact that the glue that holds this country together, quickly called the american dream is likely to become afraid of change course rapidly, the american memory is something that is a very commit very powerful motion. the postconcert mayor could know very casually. my meeting she said you'd understand. you think this is education inequity and even economic issue. this is america's national security issue but she and richard have the foresight to bring the council to bear. most of the people in this room, if you didn't get it, you wouldn't be here. but we are an eco-chamber. we talk to each other.
we are smug about the fact that if we are not remotely transforming the country. i found the luncheon discussion today important, but a little dispirited because we don't have the time to dabble around the edges. as we speak right now in america for the first time, we are raised in a generation that was well educated than their parents were at a time when we needed to raise a generation that's much more well-educated for this generation but even predict educational outcomes based on zip codes zip codes of ultima fans is related with race and ethnicity. we are raising a generation of which there is no great public outcry about this issue. this will decide what kind of nation ever want to worry about the fiscal cliff. it's obviously a very important issue. we will be solved that issue. but today mr. rate in cities like new york, chicago and
detroit and elsewhere, kids are now being condemned to a life that's going to be very humbling and frustrating because i know for a fact this case are not going to be able to read. they're not going to compete and they're not going to make up some miraculous way in the 12th grade. so having this twist of focusing on national security may lead this country to understand that if we don't get off the path we are on, we're on a path to a very different kind of america. the person who deserves enormous credit contriving this task force is secretary rice. [applause] >> well, let's talk for a minute about what it would take two if you will, close the gap between where we are and where we want to be. one way to think about it is
just the basic skills. one thing we've decided that the council on foreign relations is also the large issue of content. what damage this privacy thinks. when the senate time the night time at the kennedy school i was stunned at the non-americans to its a lot more about physics and foreign policy than the world of american students. more non-americans had with the toqueville rice, the federalists and the american. i was one thing that caught me up. the other was a recent experience where he spent time at the young man graduated from stanford in computer sciences. i started asking him what he studied behind computer issues that i was shocked he could graduate from this amazing university where condi teaches and he had when economics course or history course. we basically said we're going to start producing at the castle curricular material. but produce simulations and
modules afford that high schools and colleges can use to close this gap between what it is kids know and what it is a need to know in order to be ready for this world to like it or not is going to fundamentally affect. >> do come from an educational background in foreign policy and security background. what is your sense to fix the problem? >> maybe i will start and then pass it to someone. i come from a national security background, cc is a product of the educational system, if you will, gives me a perspective on what it is we need to achieve in that period of time. obviously a fan produced at the very, very best. i would so you two things. number one, if you have low
expectations of even the best in its comment they will live down to them. [applause] so i come out come out this with the belief that the most important thing is that whatever you're teaching, you have to have very, very high standards. frankly i'm not much but good self-esteem movement, everyone gets a trophy. [applause] i'm a musician myself and i think that the arts are important, but how many of these little performances have you been to work his run all over the stage and they think it's cute, no it's not. it will be better if they know something. so my first and most important point is high standards whatever you teach them. secondarily, i do believe that the common core, which we talked about in the report has a chance
to give us some grounding in not just the sensitive knowledge, but the wave of acquiring knowledge. i believe in stem obviously. as a side effect to be able to write. it is a very undervalued skill, particularly these days. [applause] it would be very useful if indeed some civics education were included. but the most important thing is that ever were going to do, we need to do it in a common way and not something that's slightly controversial, the country, the united states of america has to have some sense of what all kids are going to acquired as a set of skill levels from the witches by the common core is a good idea.
it doesn't mean that we don't have local control of education and the states are obviously the place of this is going to get done. it does mean, however, that in a highly competitive and highly mobile labor pool, alabama and california and texas and vermont have to have some sense that their kids have a common basis of knowledge. so since a common core team up to the national governors association was in that sense a local initiative, i would hope we could have more discussion about how to make certain. >> i was watching when you were talking about the self-esteem movement, really didn't hurt doing work in the united kingdom right now come you got all
excited. so in the k-12 system, this goes to the heart of it. in the k-12 system right now, there is this deep belief who said we needed to develop a kids self-esteem so she can perform. i was going would like to do server-side. they need to perform in order to have self-esteem. if we get that right, we will change the system. i think the common core is critically important. elevating standards is important. for me i think there are three things that have potential. they're not easy to achieve. first of all, effectively if they want tomorrow, or it may k-12 teachers america's heroes. they beat the profession that we all aspire to. there would be seen in places like japan, would they call teachers sensei, reflecting what they call lawyers, doctors and university professors. think of the difference between
the way the two university professors in america and the way we view k-12 teachers. places like finland have a pretty good at 100% wrong. we trade unionists rather than professionalize. we've decided seigneur geismar port important than excellence. when you do that, which even if it's a race to the bottom and that's what we've created a k-12. second of all, given where we are. i think choice is critical and it's a fundamental but fun of the report. bob was not unanimous, there is enormous support. no one in this room voluntarily agree to send your kid randomly to a school in d.c. understand what i just said. no one in this room with another kid. you would move, you would go to private school. you pull strings, but she would not just playing with that. on the other hand, whose kids go to those schools in new york?
suite opc, other people's children. as viruses and people's children to schools with us and her children too, shame on us. [applause] i insisted on my daughter. we should insist on it for a people. if you think about k-12 cudworth got a lot of problems in postsecondary people from all over the world come to america to look at a postsecondary schools. nobody comes here to look at our k-12 system. postsecondary are not guaranteed. you're not a monopoly provider in the absence of competition, we continue to hobble along. the third thing is something others have been pushing for at one time. when i heard a man's chance to come and they said stop trying to fix the broken system. create a new and effective system. we've got two atlantic elegy like everybody else does to empower our teachers come in
future students and change the whole service process. so to me those three things are some critical issues. [applause] >> one thing since we are looking at the question of education and national security. we are all english speakers. pacific ocean for the proper place of language training. what ought to be introducing to what degree audit be a priority. >> well, i am a proponent of kids learning languages earlier just because it's easier. if you've ever tried to learn a language at 35, you'll know what i mean. it's easier when you were younger. your brain imprints that way. it's like music. look, to be quite blunt, i'd first like to make sure they can speak english and write in it
because too many of our kids can't do that. but one question is whether there is some way to spread the task, a few well, some of the things our kids need to learn. we may not be able to do everything in the school day in the schools. i've been very active with the boys and girls club and betsy mentions that we started something called the center for a new generation in palo alto park in redwood city. it's a high-quality computer intensive afterschool and summer program for kids three hours after school. and did they get languages and did they get instrumental music and some of the things that maybe can't be fit into the school day because i saw reminded me, where the shortest learning day and the shortest learning here in the developed
world. i doubt were going to be off to extend the learning day in most places. perhaps finding other alternatives -- i learned to speak french, but he actually learned it at age nine. but not in the schools. other good because believe it or not, my father who was a presbyterian minister decided that all educated children should speak french. so on tuesdays, thursdays and saturdays, we were dragged down to the church to take french witnesses do not afford. so there may be some ways to add to the curriculum outside of the school system. >> if i come back if anything, i want to come back as the son of a presbyterian minister. i've been so shortchanged in life. >> monday, tuesday, wednesday, thursday, what good is that?
[laughter] by now i would be playing the piano, speaking french. but richard come when he first called me about this come you said something that struck me in terms not just a foreign language in global history, we live in such a different world and our kids by and large are clueless about not just the language. these kids you talk about no about the constitutional sin no more about the middle east and china. if you came to the average high school in new york city and ask us about what's happening in the world, i think it would take your breath away. i really do. i watched justice o'connor bannister on in terms of civic education in the united states. this is really a serious problem. so that is one part of it. the second part of my technology can matter is because we don't
have to limit the school day any more to the hours inside the school room. there's much more we can do. i've watched some folks here, a great school in sweden. i've been there to visit them in their managed to create a nonmedicated of a school whose mother was a nurse and had one day of week or she could work on the internet in that time. one of my heroes have a good idea and that is he said were the only profession that it is worth feeling of what were doing kid and we all go home at 3:00. there's got to be a way to think differently about the dimensions of the challenge and technology as part of that problem. i want to go back to work on the started because as important as music and art in global history
and so forth, kids who can't read and do basic mathematics are not going to mess the global history. or do higher order or critical thinking. so we've got to figure out how to build the foundation to build on the foundation. right now tragically we are doing neither. >> you point out the fact that many measures the united states, were following behind. a rank a lot higher than we are now a basic skill sets. what can we learn? what is that we can learn and if you will come to import from others? >> just a cautionary note on the importation idea. one thing we can clearly learn his scholls point about teachers. the people who go into the profession, training people get.
i was provost of the university that has a very high-ranking education school. but i think there's real problems in the way teachers are trained. and so -- [applause] one thing we can look at how the profession is treated in other places. secondly, obviously i think the standard issue as a major web. one thing i learned on the task force, kids in korea are they made the grade three what our kids are the grade five. there is a reason for that. but obviously are not having high standards. i think there is undoubtedly a lot we can learn from others. or not china or not singapore and we are not so much. we are a, diverse, federal, very complicated country. so one question we ask is what
can we learn from ourselves in other parts of the educational system that are more successful? chilled by the tertiary education, postsecondary. the universities, colleges across the board are the standard internationally. what do they have k-12 does not have? number one, they have competition. [applause] secondly, they have sobriety. it is not one-size-fits-all. you go to community college, liberal arts, big research come the spot research. they have variety. one of the things between a task force to say the first american excellent that could be imported into the k-12 education system. that firm a confirmed that
monopolistic tendencies in the k-12 education system may be the biggest problem. so there are things we can learn from others, but there's also an awful lot we learn from ourselves in other areas of american life that are more successful. >> it was so impactful in terms of the task is, but the two things that give people hope about our country is we still believe or want to believe that marriage matters most. it's not where you came from, who your people are or what you accomplished through your hard work and application of your talents to the challenges you face. the second thing is the dynamism and innovation. no place in the world and a basic america does. look at our school system. there it is irrelevant to the equation and innovation you don't even hear about. someone asked me what it's about in education. it's hard to tell there hasn't
been in so long we couldn't capture it in a bottle. if you think about dynamism and merit in a few specific k-12 system and it goes to the schools, which in finland whatever the comparison is, for every 10 people who apply, they accept one. in america for everyone who applies, they take time. what kate walsh and people are doing -- it's true. what they are doing is really important. as cto for going to fix the problem is that you transfer me system that doesn't even merit and she's innovation to him that has dynamism that is the hope that the future this country and will be the hope of the future of our education. >> the dishonest in american schools. >> when they give you an example. the last thing i did before that the public school system in new york come to think about. i was with someone who is the
president of ibm. truthfully haven't done enough for schools. beaujolais committed to? is a truthfully, take a two-year community college, mix it with a four-year high school and train people to be technicians. people select the school appeared at the end of six years that they get out of the school they get their associates degree and you ibm, certificates and the. if they meet your criteria, you hired them. and to his great credit, agreed to do this in the upper new school in new york city a year ago and people are lined up around the block to get into it. it is such an exciting dynamic. everybody says you can't mix community college. why can't you mix community college with k-12? the bureaucrat worship at different churches, so you can't make spam. [laughter] you can't bring business into
certificate because only the educators can certificate. what would the educators know of a certificate in people and technology? the guy i admire most is rahm emanuel. they said what did she do? to just give bloomberg this grade school. i thought you were my friend? i set out to be one, too. he said no, no, you did limburg first-come effect to give me five. so we did fight. if you think about it, why can't we open this thing up to the differentiation? redo this cookie-cutter thing is that all these kids are the same. someone asked today was the difference between college and career ready? everyone on the panel that site here in the headlights because nobody wants to answer the question. one way to think about the question is why do we create a meaningful career and vocational opportunities for kids so that if applicable skill sets and markets. not everybody in a few will do a
four-year liberal arts. i think they're highly valuable. we can create a differentiated system in which people have different career path. what we can't do is simply abandoned caves, which is the are now doing in k-12. [laughter] [applause] >> i'm going to ask a few people here to improve the quality of the questions. we are going to begin with the secretary does it at a new mexico for the public education department. >> good evening. we started the conversation tonight and we put a lot of ideas on the table. to articulate their number one idea, the changes of education therefore our national security
and our nation. but would it be? and if we don't deliver on that, what do we look like in the 21st? if you look at the results about a third of the kids are in charter schools. what is amazing is the harlem district went up inspect is apples to apples went up dramatically from when we started the intensive choice process there. now it was something like 28th
out of 32 districts. now it's about 16. now only do the charter schools plnch almost everybody. the public schools which are 28th moved up significantly themselves. i think those are two instances of model we should develop. i think in new orleans written about in term of reforming and relinquishing and work on the portfolio are important idea that need development. that's why i would come down. >> i would agree that it's choice, and for two reasons. the cat lettic effect on the system, if you will, because going again from the system it's a college isn't getting applicants it will go out of business or it will do something to start to get applicants. there's a cat lettic effect on the underperformers of having people be able to make choices with their kids and especially i
are for poor parents. someone said on the task force we can't have an opt out system. we have an opt out system. s a he said that's why houses are expensive in palo alto. people opt in to the district with the kids or they go to the private school. the only people stuck in failing neighborhood schools are poor people. that's the height of inequality. that's why it's called a civil rights issue. they need choices. it will have them an effect on the individual child more kids will be better educate and ting will have a effect on the -- so i would say -- [inaudible] [applause] >> i would only add standards. i think it's important as we as a society set expectations for what it is we want. the secretary of state -- not
sense that cobbed lee -- condoleezza rice was the in the united nations where i got educate. i look forward to hearing from you. >> thank you. >> can i say it's been an absolute pressure to hear you. it was worth traveling coach class. [laughter] [applause] >> the ultimate. >> to hear you spike. >> the first time i ever worried about you. >> us a tear i have -- [laughter] but you made the point that idea massive when you are changing things. they matter in national security. one of the reasons that america won the cold war, it recognized it was a moral conflict as much as nick else. an american realized they couldn't win the cold war and the -- [inaudible] in particular if it still had a scandal of segregation. so winning the civil rights a
precondition of winning the liberty across the globe. no i think looking from the outside if you'll forgive me, the same danger now. go to china and i criticize them for the lack of democracy. but they say yes, they are educating all of their people. in the middle east and i talked to people there on the edge of radicalism. they say look at the -- [inaudible] justices in your british and european and american nations. we would never allow that under an islam state. no. these are self-serving version of the truth. never the less they have power. i want to -- [inaudible] american political leaders articulate the case but actually as long as there is inequality driven by education in america. the capacity to provide the moral leadership is comprised
and then when people hide behind the argument of state right and say we don't want, you know, corp. common standards because we need, you know, protect our state rights. one of the thing it reminds me sufficient the argument in 1960 that the state right are the right of citizens inspect particular, i think as a conservative, it worries me that people don't accept as you said, secretary rice, this is the civil right challenge of the time. if row are -- poor citizens in mississippi behind the mask of state right there it no choice or diversity view. all of the schools are bad school in the state and almost all of the children face a bleak future. surely the party of lincoln and the democrats can get together and say we need to solve the civil rights problem now in order to ensure that america can lead again.
[inaudible] [applause] [applause] >> first of all, i'm glad you made the trip. [laughter] >> this is great. [laughter] >> i wouldn't agree more. indeed, the united states, i believe, that the greatest force of our leadership abroad is not our military. we have a wonderful military. not even the economic strength obviously we have tremendous economic strength. it is this great american creed that resonates around the world. that you can come with the circumstances and do great things. that has lead people to come here for generations from all over to be a part of that. which is why we have been the best at mobilizing human potential from all over the world through immigration. but it's not just mobilizing the human potential from abroad. it's mobilizing human potential from all segments and classes of
america so you are not trapped in your circumstances education was the way out. i will tell a brief story because it's my own family story. i am third generation college educate. why is that? because john senior my grandfather on my father's side when he was a young man in alabama decided he was going get a college education so he asked how a colored man could go to college. 1990 they told him about little stillman college. thirty miles away. went off to still nann college, paid for his first year. second year comes along they say how are you going pay for the second year? they said you are out of cotton and you are out of luck. how are they going to college? they said they have a scholarship. if you wanted to be a minister you could have a scholarship too. [laughter] and my grand dad said that is exactly what i had in mind.
[laughter] and our family, our family has been college effected, by the way, press betyrian ever since. [laughter] he knew he knew somehow about that transforming power of education. but the wonderful part of that story is that out of alabama sharecroppers son in two generations the secretary of state his granddaughter. [applause] [applause] whatever people have thought of our policies around the world. whatever people have thought about us that story resonates and if that's no longer true in the united states of america then we will not lead because we won't have the moral fiber to lead. >> no. i agree with you. i would say one thing. i think in one sense it's important as america's leadership role in the world. i think the domestic consequences are greater for the
country. when we have a country in which there is virtually no mobility. you look at the -- [inaudible] and how few of those are going high quality colleges today and social mobility is really drastically different. we don't want to get our head around that. i don't think it's in term of the global leadership. we eat ourself up from the inside. i believe the question tom brokhaw wrote about the great generation people fight and die with pride. they believe in what secretary rice is talking about. i need to question for the generation is not whether we are fight and die literally whether we will fight for american that believes in the american dream whether we allow it to become the american memory as long as we divide ourself what is going to happen is the hollowing out of the middle class. it that happens we are going to lose hope. if we lose hope the global consequences will almost pale in
comparison. it comes back to the major security case for improving education. it's the produced the conjure of people we need staff the various government agencies and the military. it is for reasons of competitiveness for reasons of scholarship. we have to vote and make other cases. i think what they are getting is fundamental. farm policy is almost the -- [inaudible] too important to be left to the diplomats. and the form policy we set by our example is in some ways as important or more important than any talking point given to any ambassador. we talked about idea. the battle for idea continue and the last five or ten years you see all sorts of people talking about singapore or china. this is the future, somehow, it's not. one of the ways we make sure it's not is actually going to be by dealing with the issues that are central to this conference here today.
next person we wanted to hear from is paul in louisiana the state super superintendent of education. >> thank you very much. it's so great to be here because this is the one time of the year where i'm surrounded by people who think like i do! [laughter] the urgency of now is now! it's not next week, next year, whatever. kids are dying for adults to get the act together. and we're also suffering every day, i believe, and i've got a new life. i walked away from the public service life and air aerospace business. >> welcome to the 1 more than. [laughter] >> i'm lucky. i'm very lucky. i'm witnessing an amazing --
today i got an e-mail from my technology person who said we've been attacked again. our computers are beings hacked. this is many times this year. we do government defense work, people are hacking our systems. trying to get our secrets. trying to understand what our government is trying to do to protect ourselves. and the urgency of now me is there are millions of jobs that are available for kids all around this country in the area of protecting our homeland whether it's protecting our secrets, or fighting on battle fields or away. the technology arena is so important. we have saw in the new orleans after katrina, when we lost technology, we lost order. we lost law and order.
technology is a huge benefit but a huge risk. there are so many people who want to say that kids just can't learn. some kids just can't learn. so i would say do we really believe kids can't learn? aren't there really opportunities for kids and isn't our security at stake in a lot of other ways other than on the battle field? but in the secret in the intellectual property of the united states and the people who work for us? and when are we going connect these dots? when are we going break the system down? when are we going blow up the system and the mentality? and i'm just excited because governor bush brings us together once a year to reflect on this and we goat hear people like you help us understand. so please, help me understand how do we connect the dots?
how do we make this real and how do we bring it to the urgency of? >> [inaudible] you're a man who did precisely that. i don't know people in the room know what paul did in louisiana, but you would not have had the recovery school district. he would not have had the result which he said. [inaudible] you talk about idea and people in ask about idea. let me tell you as important as the idea are. there are billions of ideas out there in the hands of weak leaders and people who can't execute and get things done bad ideas and end up on a cutting -- [inaudible] and about i'm people. when i see guys like paul, i've been waiting all day to say this. a lot of people have talked about my friend tony bennett who lost. it's painful for me. ic he was a true leader when he came to education and didn't sit around and check in with all of the pollsters and hold his finger to the wind and find out what he needed to do to get
reelectedded. unlike most people, he thought doing something was more important than perpetuating himself in the job. -- [applause] i would say -- [applause] , i mean, -- [applause] >> no, i mean, it. [applause] >> i just want to answer your question, bob, i would rather in life have it said of me i was tony bennett. i did something and i lost. rather than than i was most people who were educational leaders who do nothing but perpetuate themselves. that's the answer to your question. [applause] we always talk about we all preach it's not about the adult. it's about the kids. the truth of the matter is too many of us it's about us. it's about the adult. it's about my job. it's about keeping my office and
so forth. and the answer to your question is, when we have the kind of leadership that actually says the ease sense of leadership -- essence is of leadership is not self-perpetuation. the essence of leadership is transforming broken system. if you happen to be a casualty your leadership will long endure. that will be true of guys like bennet and you and the others who have taken the flight fearlessly. i thank you for that, tony. [applause] >> it's a version of which is in your advocated of change in the issue it's the general answer revolution or -- how radical do you need to be in the area? what is your? you have worked on it now. >> well, look, i don't think we have time for evolution. that's my concern. [applause] i think that we have -- we're losing a generation of kids not
every 18 years if you don't read by the grade three you won't read. we're losing a generation of kids that -- [inaudible] as i look at the particularly joe's point about what is happening to mobility in the united states. the disappearing middle class, the prospect of children who come from difficult circumstances, i don't think we have time for evolution. and one of the reasons that i thought this might get some attention is, again, as richard said in the room, you know, you have already -- [inaudible] you believe. but how do you get people who don't leave this as their issue to see it as their issue? the civil rights issue became all of america's issue when my hometown of pirm -- birmingham turned so violent and ugly. four little girls were killed in
the church in birmingham on a september sunday nobody could any longer deny or avert their eyes as to what was going on in the segregated south. then it became everybody's issue and we got change. nothing is that dramatic seems likely in the educational realm. how do you make it everybody's issue? one reason call tk a national security issue helps is it's too easy to say, well, you know, my kids are doing all right. and if that kid doesn't get well educate in east oakland, it's not my problem. i feel bad and give a little bit of money to the education drive or, you know, but i don't really have to act. well, we hoped by saying, look, this is a national security issue. which mean it is comes and sits your door. people will understand that it is not about other people's children, it's about our country. and if it's about our country, then we all have to be driven to
act and given that i believe strongly that good ideas and people matter but so does collective action matter. making sure that when people stand for office, they have an answer. on what we're going to do about the poor state of education in the united states of america. we would never allow somebody to get away without having an answer about economy or foreign policy. but this is an urgent issue and we don't have the time for evolution. [applause] >> lead us to produce the report and -- [inaudible] gnash security issue was the fight about hiv/aids and you can't look at it through the prism of health. it would destablize countries. beyond the human consequences the failed states and it would
have national security consequences. and the fact the administration served in a senior level i was in and jeb's brother was president of. that was a perfect example of taking an issue from realm, if you will, and recashing it you created a broader, more powerful coalition. my own sense that education is an issue where this can be done as well and it's because of people such as yourselves who have dedicated your lives and your careers to it. speaking of which, are the two people up here -- one of the most difficult jobs many america. is chancellor of schools in the city, i'm lucky enough to live in and day out day out year upon year. he went in and did battle. that's not the definition of public service, i don't know what is. and condoleezza rice who i have been lucky to work with.
she too has given to the country in a enormous ways. and the fact that she's one of the standard bearers along with joel the education debate. one of the reason i feel confident. i think the issue is increasingly across partisan issue. a lot of improvement that need to be done don't take extra resources. they take using existing resources difficult lip. that opens up tremendous possibilities. so i want to kind of end where i began. i want to thank jeb for his entrepreneurship and the equipment. [applause] -- commitment [applause] >> i want to thank joel and condoleezza rise. i want to thank them forest fire decades all the public service and the best sense of the words. i want to thank you all. the fact that you're here and the fact that you are working this issue day in day out year in year out. it's one of the many,s i'm
the house transportation and infrastructure hold a hearing wednesday on amtrak restructuring plan. members will hear from the inspector general and amtrak's president on recommends for intiewfing operations. you see it live at 10:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. worked the way up went to harvard law school and then at the urging of one his brother immigrated out twos illinois to georgia lee that where the industry was hay day. he arrived after about a month's journey by ship, by stagecoach, by train and arrived in the steam boat in the muddy, mining town boarded himself in a log
cabin, established a law practice in a log cabin and slowly work his way up and became a successful lawyer there. and got involved politically ran for congress, served for eight terms, and then be friended and lincoln, obviously from illinois and you lis sis s. grant from georgia lee that. as they rise were on the rise wash burn stayed with them as a close confident colleague during the civil war. and then after grant was elected president, he initially pointed wash burn secretary of state and at that time wash burn became very, very ill. his family feared for his life after about ten day he submitted he resignation. grant regretfully accepted his resignation. over the next several months he regained his health when was
very fragile. he regained his health and so grant then offered him the position as minister in france. ambassador of france. researcher michael hill on wash burn minister to france during the 1870 during the war and the only diplomat from a major power to stay during the seeing of paris providing political and humanitarian support. q & a sunday night at 8:00 on c-span. former florida governor jeb bush called for higher education standards in the u.s. delivering opening remarks for the town dangers fifth annual summit on education reform. the two-day summit is host bid the foundation for excellence. it includes education secretary an knee duncan and state policy makers inspect is thirty minutes. [applause] good morning, everybody. it is with great pride i'm going
to introduce governor bush this morning. we met a over twenty five years ago, i don't think he has it on the résume still, i was in tallahassee and i helped recruit move jeb to tallahassee in 1986 and i don't think he has forgiven me for that. but he was a secretary of commerce, as you may remember for a couple of years, and after i negotiated salary then governor elect renegotiated his salary not upward but downward, as it turns out that's why he doesn't like me. we blame friends as he served in the administration and in 1993, twenty years ago after coming off of the statewide campaign, jeb and i were playing golf in miami and we were went back to his house and i said, i think that running for governor and he said you're running for
governor? i wouldn't do that if i were you. i'm going run for governor. we bushes think long and hard about these things but i'm going do it. it was in february of ?eex and since that time i had the honor and privilege to be his partner. i was chairman of his three gubernatorial campaigns and we have become great friends and i have been honored to serve under his leadership. he was a principal of governor, principal politician and used every bit of his political power to work for kids who had no other advocates and for parents most of whom department vote for him. he was all in on education and used every bit of his office and power to achieve what seems so
simple then what is obviously much manufacture complex the numbers speak for nems terms what we've been able to achieve. persistence, courage, principle, strategic thinking, as jeb likes to say, the job is never done. and this roomful of people today can attest to the fact that the job isn't done yet. it is with great honor and pride i i introduce governor jeb bush. [applause] [applause] thank you guys. thanks. thank you. thank you, phil for that overly generous introduction. thank you all for coming. patricia and i and a couple of
other people five years ago about two months ago five years ago we were worried that the first summit if anybody would show up. and quite few people less showed up five years ago than today and we're dloighted that you're here. more importantly you involved in something that is i think is a cause bigger than other which is the restoration of american greatness by ashowerring that the next renner ration has the power of knowledge. we all in our different kinds of way are involved in this. i know, it gets frustrating. it's a big fight. it's no a happy place if you want to i'd like to recognize g purdue much north carolina and
governor will page of maine. governors are important, i think, they used to be. i thought they were important the out of the all the important people, i just wanted to pay tribute to the two current dwoa i think governor angler from michigan who is now the hid of the business round table is going to be here or is here now michael, the secretary of education in great britain is h we are delighted that he last night shared some of his feelin about education reform and how we have some of in common. these are global challenges that every country is facing. he shared a perspective that was interestin i want to the thank the speaker that will be speaking to us ove the next two days, secretary duncan, who i think is has done a spectacular job of secretary of education here in washington condolezza rice and joe kline a dynamic duo will be sharing a
their views about the importance of education reform as it relates to foreign policy john podesta will be speaking tomorrow and mitch daniels, who i think is probably the greates sitting governor in the united no disrespect to the other governors in the room, in terms of education policy and moving the needle. we're going award him with the first annual education explens award. i think he's well disperveg as it as he moves on to purdue university. we thank you for being here. i don't know about you. i get moved a lot by books. smart people csh i'm not smart, i try to steal ideas from people. the best i can tell. i have never gotten sued for it. i encourage you all to do it too. past is prologue, we were a the the national archives building last night. it's etched on the side of the building. it history has a way of repeating itself. learning from history, i think,
is important. and i just read a book written by charles murray a great social scientist that i read it about six months ago. it disturbing me each time i think about it. because it describes in some ways this great challenge that we face as a nation. it really describes the challenge in our society away from a upwardly mobile, socially mobile country that has shared purpose and shared identities to a country that is changing not for the better. in fact, what murray does is he takes through all sorts of data points most fry are the census but all sorts of other data points he describes belmont, massachusetts, in 1960 and compares it to this town, which is a blue collar community inside of urban philadelphia. he takes out all of the minority
elements, the data point in these numbers and basically looks at white america in 1960 and upper mid class belmont, massachusetts and compared it to working class middle class philadelphia and sees what happens over the last fifty years. and what happens is tragic for our country. belmont fifty years later has done pretty good. north carolina levels are slightly up. outcome as it relates to high school graduation and college graduation are good. crime rates are low and they got lower. families are intact. church participation, civic participation. all of the indicators one would suggest traditionally in the country or the indicater of a healthy kind of community belmont is doing quite well. this town on the gap between fish town in 1960 and belmont
were their row. they have seen incomes drop dramatically in real terms. college participation rates for the first time, and this was a trend in our own country, across the country, college graduation rates are lower fifty years later than they were in 1960. high school graduation rates are lower. crime rates have gone up. family life has been decimated. either people are not getting married and having children or they are being divorced. church participation is con. outcomes are down. now we have a huge gap between what was a middle class community where people can wake up each day and say if i work hard and dream the biggest possible dreams, i can be the next successful person. in the pursuit of the success. they create more opportunity for people. that's the definition the notion of who we are as a nation.
it's going away. it's leaving us. the first thing i would is i think it's important for us to realize, and the arguments murray's point this is culture phenomena. others could make the case it's a economic phenomena. i don't think it's important what the cause, the first step is recognize we have a huge problem in our country. these gaps on income and the fact is that more and more people that are born in the poverty to will stay in to poverty. the middle class is being disrupted in ways that are dramatic. it's a huge problem. and we'll let others have the debate about why it is and maybe a combination of many things. but i think question all share the belief that there is one path that we know for certain that could change this course. and that is to assure that we move to a child-centered education system. we have no excuses for the fact that we have the big education gaps that will yield income gaps and lives that are con trained
because people don't have the power of -- knowledge. in fact in america today one of the most socially mobile countries in the world a generation ago 43% of people born in to poverty will stay in to poverty. 4% of people born in to poverty will make it to the top percent tile of income in our country. where is the outrage? where is the shame of this is this is not the america we love. this is the dramatically changed america. my first point would be we ought to shake the complacent sei all. all of us have a role to shape the complacent sei that exist. to challenge the orthodox of the time to be sure that we reverse it before it is too late. a third of our kids despite of, i know it will sound strange but you all secretly those in the legislature know this, we spend
more student than any country in the world. a third of our kids graduate from high school prepared to be either career ready or college ready. a third gate piece of paper that says i've graduated from high school and that may give them some source of pride. they try to get a job they have to do remedial work to be qualified for an entry-level job. if they want to go to higher education they have to take remedial math and leng list. third within we have db a majority of the students are taking high school work over again because we didn't get it right it at all. a third drop auto. the world we're moving toward those numbers unacceptable. what is the solution? what do we do? how do we do it? the good news is that in the states that are rent here today, a lot of great work is being done. and it's being done in the comprehensive way. i would suggest you that high standards, i'm not kidding
standards, the same for everybody is the first step, secondly that we need robust accountability where there's a different consequence when you have success and improvement or excellence compared to mediocrity and failure. third we need to have a teacher evaluation system that is based on teachers being professional not part of some collective trade union bargaining process. third, that we need robust school choice because at least my ante-dote l evidence is 13,000 monopoly don't change unless there are options unless you put pressure on the system. it will always be insular and focused on the adult. and we need embrace technology. the most important thing that we do for our society and the most technological age ever existed there's huge opposition to embracing technology in a way that transform our education system. all of you know how hard it is
to implement an agenda that is based on the five points. because all of you in some form or another are trying to do this at the state level. it's three steps forward, two steps back. senator bell told me of a federal judge that decided that in one of the parishes in louisiana, after the most historic legislation that he sponsored, it was signed in the law by governor jen dahl. it's been ruled unconstitutional we had a similar kind of challenge in the state of florida. these are setbacks that require constant vigilance and continued work. there will be push back can galore going forward. if we stay true to these five principles, five ideas, and we're faithful in our implementation we can reverse this trend and -- [inaudible] that exists in the country. up with of the great challenge if our country is to raise accountability, raise standards to set higher expectations of what the next generation.
benchmark it to the world. make it competitive with the world's best. michael talked about how great britain has done that successfully. the united states needs to transform its system of expectations in the same way. common core state standards is the right step in that distribution. 46, i think, states have embraced this idea of fewer, higher, expectations that require critical thinking skills that are benchmarked to the best in the world. common core will also bring out unfortunately, for those that are come complacent that are living in lala land will bring a painful reality check to many moms and dads and the business leaders and the anemia love the own community and schools which is that all children are not above average. i know that will be a shock to a lot of people, but the simple fact is that all children aren't above average. even the kids that we think are
above average, right-hand turn above average when we benchmark them to like students in other part of the world. i don't know if you have followed what happened in kentucky. kentucky is the first state to adopt common core standards back in february of 2010. now is the first state to base the assessment on the new standards. most states will have these ready to go by 2014. and i would like to graduate the state board of education and governor for getting kentucky students off to a head start in this great 21st century challenge of higher expectations. but as anticipated, the test results came in, and the kids in kentucky suddenly seemed to get a lot dumber all the sudden. 66% of kentuckys element students scored proficient or higher on the old reading assessment in 2010 and 2011. that dropped to 48% when the common core standards were
implemented in the new assessment tools were used. math scores took a huge as well with a percent of students earning profesht scores plunging from 73% to 40%. scoit an early warning indicators for the rest of the nation as other states implement common core. we'll have a challenge, the challenge will be should we ignore the fact that our children aren't truly college and or career ready? should we accept the fact that we're moving to second class status for or will we have the courage to say the course to faithfully implement higher standards to assess them accurately and recognize the fact that too many of our children are lagging behind? the initial reaction will be, it's already started, in florida it's begun and other places as well, "kill the messenger." blame it on the test. blame it on somebody. flame on the former governor. there's all sorts of people you blame the stuff on.
the simple fact is if we're going restore american greatness, which we all want, whether we are liberal or conservatives, we have to start with higher expectations for the next generation. the state that retreat on rigor will be shortchanging their children and putting them at the competitive disadvantage not only with kids from other states, but also with kids from other nations. if we have learned one lesson from reform, it is this. we continually underestimate children. setting high standards and demanding results drive student academic. far from getting dumber, the students in kentucky will on the way to getting smarter. it will take some adjustment, our kids will rise to the challenge of these new standards that we give them the opportunity and tools to do it. corporations that depend on students being college and/or career ready when they graduate from high school need to be part of the. there's a growing number of
corporation that are doing just that. more than 100 roman catholic diocese from los angeles to orlando are adopting the standards as well. along with a growing list of other private schools because they recognize the quality of common core and the need to stay competitive. these are , by the way, just for the record, these are standards that are developed by the stakes that come together in our great federalist tradition around this idea that our standards were too low and 46 states have been embraced this idea inspect is not top down driven kind of stuff. i would be the last person to support standards conceived and created by the federal government. irrespective who the president is or who the secretary of session is. when people tell you that's the case. it's not true. this is has been a long-term effort that is important for us, i think, to create a reality check and the initiative is voluntary.
it does not dictate curriculum or teaching strategies. the federal government jumped in to the state bandwagon. not the other way around inspect is something i think that is important for us stay the course. high expectations is only one step though in what we need to do and many states states are focused on other element of comprehensive trait gi. accountability, to me, is so%. seems to me lessons learned in life oughted to be applied to education. we reward the things we want more of. we especially reward excellence. we're not as happy with when there's mediocrity and we create strategy to turn mediocrity to failure -- that's is the simple basket accountability system that should be applied in every school district in the country. ten states have started this journey what seems to be a simple thing, but ask them how complicated and difficult it can
be be you bring ultimate transparent sigh by grading schools a, b, c, d, and f. on learning gain and how they do the proficiency. it's a game changer. it aligns everybody interest toward what we want more. which is rising student achie. it rewards dplens and when people are in the kids are d schools or f schools. ask janet oklahoma or ask bobby, john in louisiana, or in indiana, ask the people that are involved in this and i guarantee you'll have the stories that i've seen all across florida, which is last -- actually on sunday when i was coming back from vacation with with my family, a lady, i was walk in madam chair international airport. a lady grabbed my shoulder and i thought oh god. who knows. when you are governor you get to do a lot of stuff but not all is
happy time. [laughter] she grabbed my shoulder and was passionate and she said, thank you. >> thank you. [laughter] and he said, you know, my kids were in a school that i thought was not doing that well, you implemented this a through f grading system, and when our school grades came out and they were a d. it greated an outcry and the principal got fired and they started to listen to parents and that school is an a school now. my kid is going college. [applause] that is what happens. [applause] robust accountability doesn't just end with grading schools. it recognizes the parents need to have power. i'm excited about the parents trigger movement across the country where parents that have no power and have been cast aside for way tongs now have been given the power to say if my school is not working, i want to say on how to change it. this is one of the great places
where the center left, right coalitions of the world need to work together. and that's exactly what is happening. parent revolution is by the own definition a liberal group and in florida where we will pass legislation next year, we are working and supposed to be center right, i guess. we will work with everybody to empower parent that right now feel hopeless about whether or not they have any say about the children's future. so this whole concept of accountability is important. talking about accountability, the idea that you would pass along kids after they reaching the end of third grade and say they are worried about the self-est steam. they must go to fourth grade even though they are functionally ill lited rate is shameful. it happenings in a majority of the state in the united states. it's the beginning of the gap
that we talk about that create a different america. better to have a system that says every child that god has given the ability to deliterate by the start of fourth grade lit rot and develop strategy to make sure it happens have no tolerance for the political correctness the time that assures too many people particularly kids living at or near the poverty level have no chance to be successful. the state that embrace a social promotion policy that does not allow that to happen that recognizes that we need early intervention for reading strategies implemented in states like colorado, and has no tolerance for the acceptance of failure will be the state that excel over the next dale. the accountability truly, truly matters. seven states have started on the journey. talked about to them about how hard it is. and the joy of seeing how you can change lives at an early age
to assure that they kids going graduate high school rather than being functionally ill literate where they can't fill out a form to get a minimum wage job. teachers are critical, really critical in the learning or so many young people in the country. it is a cliche, i guess to say this. it is true. we have a system to reward teacher that base upon a industrial unionized model that is completely inappropriate on the 21st century. completely inappropriate. there is are incredibly fine teacher that get paid less even though they're doing the lord's work consistently over time. and there are teachers that medium that get paid more because they have been there longer. longevity is not the determining factor of success in the classroom. we need to make sure ha we provide all sorts of resources for teachers when they are struggling to be aable to assure that more than a handful of the
kids gate year's worth of knowledge in a year's time. we should have no tolerance for when there's failure. we should move to a stham rewards and elevate the profession of teaching as a profession and moves away from the system where, you know, longevity of service is the determining factor of how much money you make nap is a challenge. trust me. there are tar marks on a lot of people's foreheads in the room that have challenged the notion. over the last five years there have been tremendous gains and new 0 coalitions are focusing -- less focus on the economic interest of both sides of the economic equation in our school district districts. 23 states are requiring annual evaluations for all teachers. 43 states have begun the process of requiring evaluation for new teachers. about six months al-qaeda in -- i don't know anybody in michigan to get mad.
six months ago i read a report by a think tank that showed in east lansing or the lansing school district something like 775 teachers were evaluated. 774 teachers got a passing evaluation. i know lancing is a great place. don't get me wrong. i'm sure it has huge spots of talented teachers. maybe we ought to raise the bar higher. have higher expectations and rewards for teachers. a great commissioner in indiana that lost the election, tony bennett. [applause] doing what is right, doing what is right is not necessarily politically rewarded all the time. that's not why we cothis.
but it is the right thing to do to transform our system of compensation and evaluation for teachers for the 21st century. and the third thing i would say or the fourth thing that school choice is the cat lettic converter to ak set rate the thing to the faster pace. we need to move the ball down the field faster. charter schools, vouchers all sorts of alternatives so parents are more ingrated and great a more open schedule is part of the answer. sweeping citizenship program from low performing schools kudos to senator for a job well done. many other states are looking at this. i would enyoung cow to stay the
course. one again there will be massive pub push back. there are a lot of people focused on the adult. it's uncomfortable for people inside the system to offer choices for parents to empower them to make choices and do a better job. but the is critical element imagine a classroom in a blended learning environment where rich digital cop tent comes from the best providers where teachers are manning the learning experience for students. where it's competent sei based where we don't sit our butts in a seat for 180 dares and say okay it's time to take three months off and come wack and sit our butts down for another 18
days. we move to a system if you master the material you are not held back. if you haven't mastered the material you're not pushed along. that's what technology offers. it's the ability to customize the learning experience and powerful way. that requires changes in law. in many states are embracing element of what is the digital learning revolution. i think they will, accelerate learning in ways that will create the gap. seat gap begin to narrow and it will create real opportunity for continuous improvement and advancement. i love the book on lyndon johnson. he was a larger than life character. all the historian will not say
he's one of the great president of the time. but if you read the third volume of the book, which is an extraordinary example of leadership, and you post it up to what exists today, it does give you hope that with proper committed leadership, a cap if you're in washington that we can going solve problems. carol writes about how johnson was vice president. he was the most powerful guy in the world in washington, d.c., right where we are. when he was majority leader. by far and away the go-to guy in washington. all things went through his office. he became vice president and helped jfk become elected president and was relegated to nothingness, in fact. he became almost invisible during the first three years of the kennedy administration. the book carol writes about how the kennedy team, which came in to washington with great hopes called him -- [inaudible]
i love boston there a lot of smart people there. i resented the fact that people in the north think that people in texas are disperving of terms like -- [inaudible] i know about you but it upsets me. we have people that are a little capable of doing things including the then president of the united states lyndon johnson. in a six-week period kept the kennedy team because it was a essential to be able to keep the momentum going on the agenda that had stalled for three years effectively. he kept the kennedy team which showed the leadership kills humility. he the leadership skill of dogged determination to create and he had the skill of creating a strategy and implemented in aics-week period a 125% across the board cut in tax rates. believe it or not as a liberal democrat the idea was to cut
taxes to raise rev now fund the great society program. he went to the senate, which was opposed to the ultimately goal of, you know, significant in the legislation and convince the dean of the senate, who was the budget chair that he would commit to a tbhawment year to year a decrees. not like they do now where it's a decrees off the grove. they use some weird accounting thing up here in washington. a real dollar for dollar reduction in the budget the first time, i think, in fifty years that took place. he got that done. and it required working sending a limo secret throughout senate to bring senatorbird to the white house to come in and to be courted in effect and held up high and, you know, be beloved by the junior now president of the united states junior when they were in the senate together and then he got the most
significant civil rights legislation passed in american history. all with six weeks. all because of leadership. all because he did not let go. it it required grabbing people by the shoulder and not letting them leave until they decided they were going support him. that's how to worked. it it required telling every dirk zen it would be shameful for the party of lincoln to oppose civil right lotion. that's what it required. it it was to pay home imagine to someone who needed to have home imagine paid to them in order change their deeply held segregationist views, he did it. my point is that leadership matters. i'm hon mored to be amongst leaders. i hope you stay the course. whether you win or lose in the political realm. that is secondary to changing the course of our country's history by focusing on doing the right things. transforming our education system. there will be loser along the